1° The question of authenticity obviously cannot be decided in such a simple and easy way as for the First Letter of Saint John, because these two writings of Saint John are so short and so undogmatic that one cannot expect to see them frequently cited by ancient authors. They were even, quite early on and for two or three centuries, the object of repeated doubts, many refusing to consider them the work of the Apostle Saint John and to attribute to them canonical value, as we learn from Origen (in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 7, 25, 10), by Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History, 3, 25, 2), which classifies it among the ἀντιλεγόμενα, and by Saint Jerome (De Viris ill., 9, 18). These last two authors add that doubt or hesitation often stemmed from the distinction made, even in those early times, between the apostle John and the priest John: the two letters were supposedly not composed by the apostle, but by the priest, his namesake. A distinction without serious basis, as is increasingly recognized today, no less among Protestant critics than among Catholics. But, in ancient times, the authenticity of 2 John and 3 John found far more supporters than opponents. Papias, in the very passage where he seems to favor the existence of the priest John (see Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3, 39, 3. Comp. 3 John 12), Saint Polycarp (Ad Phil., 7, 1; cf. 2 John 7) and Saint Ignatius (Ad Smyrn., 4, 1; cf. 2 John 10) borrow from them. While the first Syriac version did not include these two letters (which did not prevent Saint Ephrem from believing in their authenticity), the Itala contains both of them. According to the most probable view, the Muratorian Canon bears witness to them: indeed, after having noted the First Letter of Saint John Immediately after the fourth Gospel, he adds, a few lines below: "the two letters whose author is Saint John are considered Catholic"; however, according to the context, these two letters can only be the second and the third. Saint Irenaeus (Adv. hær., l, 16, 3 and 3, 16, 8) cites verse 11 and verses 7-8 of the second letter, which he says in his own words was composed by the apostle Saint John. Clement of Alexandria (Stromata, 2, 15, 66 and 6, 14, 1. See also Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6, 14,1) and Dionysius of Alexandria (in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 7, 25, 11) are also very expressly in favor of authenticity. Saint Cyprian, in his account of what happened at the Council of Carthage in 256, mentions that a bishop named Aurelian quoted 2 John 10 and 11, with this introductory formula: "John the Apostle said in his letter." Finally, while Eusebius and Saint Jerome appear, at first glance, to have somewhat shared the doubts they point out, other passages in their writings show that they actually considered these two short letters to be authentic (see Eusebius, Evangelical Demonstration, 3, 5, and Saint Jerome, Ep. 146, ad Evagr.).
Here again, intrinsic evidence singularly confirms that of the testimonies transmitted by antiquity, so great is the resemblance of thought and style between 2 and 3 John on the one hand, and the fourth Gospel and 1 John on the other. The second and third letters share with these two other more substantial compositions of Saint John numerous concepts and expressions (compare 2 John 5 with John 13:34 and 1 John 13:34). John 2, 7; 2 John 7, with 1 John 4, 1-3; 2 John 9, with 1 John 2, 23; 2 John 12b, with 1 John 1, 4; 3 John 11, with 1 John 3, 6; 3 John 12, with John 21, 24, etc.); in particular the phrases "to be of God, to have God the Father, true God, to have the Son, to know the truth, to walk in the truth, to walk in love, complete joy," etc., the words διαθήϰη (commandment), ἀληθεία (truth), μαρτυρεῖν (to bear witness), μένειν (to abide), etc. Verses 10 and 11 of 2 John clearly recall the "son of thunder"; likewise 3 John 9-10. This does not prevent the two small letters from having their particularities of diction (for example the verbs ὑπολαμϐάνειν, φιλοπρωτεύειν, φλυαρεῖν, etc.), like all the other parts of the New Testament.
The title πρεσϐύτερος (phonetically: presbutéros), which the author uses at the beginning of the two letters, has sometimes been raised as an objection to the authenticity of the texts; but "this title rather guarantees an apostolic origin," for it alone signifies a very great and paternal authority, such as that of Saint John. Its origin is easily understood. The apostle's disciples in Asia began to call him familiarly and respectfully "the elder" par excellence, because of his advanced age and the patriarchal nature of his rule; and this name gradually became so frequently used that Saint John himself used it to refer to himself, just as he uses the title of beloved disciple in his Gospel, by which he is easily recognized. In any case, a forger would never have thought of calling himself that.
2° The recipients and purpose of the letter. –
The Third Letter is addressed to a devout Christian named Gaius (see verse 1 and the notes), a member of a Christian community quite far from the city where Saint John was then living. This generous man had previously granted the’hospitality to several missionaries who were passing through the area where he was staying (verses 3, 5), and who, upon returning to the apostle, had solemnly praised their host before the whole Church (verse 6). Since they were about to leave to preach the gospel again and were to see Gaius again (verses 6b-7), Saint John entrusted them with this letter. In writing it, the apostle intended first and foremost to thank Gaius and encourage him to always welcome Christ's missionaries. But in addition, since Diotrephes, the bishop of the Church to which Gaius belonged, did not recognize John's supreme authority and refused to receive those who were in communion with him, the author aimed to strongly rebuke this arrogant and intolerant bishop and to threaten him with an imminent denunciation of his conduct before his own flock (see verses 9-10).
3° The time and place of composition can only be determined approximately, as we lack both extrinsic and intrinsic information. Everything suggests, however, that Saint John composed these two letters in Ephesus, and during the last period of his life, that is, towards the end of the 1st century.er century of our era. It is the fairly general opinion of commentators that they form the most recent part of the entire New Testament.
4° The plan is easy to determine.
The Third Letter is divided as follows: the usual address and greeting, verses 1-2; the body of the letter, verses 3-12; the epilogue, verses 13-14. Three main thoughts appear in the body of the letter: praise of Christian conduct and of the’hospitality of Gaius (verses 3-8); severe reproaches for Diotrephes (verses 9-11); congratulations for a zealous Christian or priest named Demetrius (verse 12).
3 John
1 I, the Elder, to Gaius, the beloved whom I love in truth. 2 Beloved, I pray that in all things you may be well and healthy, as is already the case for your soul. 3 I had a lot of joy when brothers came and testified to your truth, I mean the way you walk in the truth. 4 I have no greater joy than to learn that my children are walking in the truth. 5 Beloved, you act faithfully in all that you do for the brothers and especially for foreign brothers. 6 They also bore witness to your charity before the church. You will do well to provide for their journey in a manner worthy of God. 7 because it was for his name's sake that they left, receiving nothing from the pagans. 8 We must support such men in order to work with them for the truth. 9 I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to hold the front row there, does not receive us. 10 That is why, when I come, I will confront him with his actions and the malicious words he speaks against us. And not only that, he himself refuses to welcome the brothers and prevents those who would welcome them from entering, even driving them out of the church. 11 Beloved, do not imitate evil, but imitate good. He who does good is of God. He who does evil has not seen God. 12 Everyone, and truth itself, bears good witness to Demetrius. We also bear him witness, and you know that our testimony is true. 13 I have many things I would like to write to you, but I don't want to do it with ink and pen. 14 I hope to see you soon and we will talk in person. Peace Be with you. Our friends send their greetings. Greet each of our friends individually.
Notes on the Third Letter of Saint John
1.1See 2 John, 1, 1.
1.6 See. Acts of the Apostles, 15, 3; Romans, 15, 24. ― Worthy of God ; as if you were doing it for God himself, which seems to be an allusion to what Jesus Christ teaches in the Gospel (see Matthew 25, 35), that it is necessary to receive and serve him in the person of strangers. According to others: As if God, in proportion, were doing it himself; that is to say, as best as possible.
1.9 Diotrephes, According to what is said in this passage, he was an influential man, but otherwise unknown, in the part of Asia Minor where Gaius was located.
1.12 Demetrius, of whom we know nothing except what is said here about him, was probably charged with delivering this letter from Saint John to Gaius.
